Was Lincoln an ethical leader? Explain thoroughly and cite the text.
Abraham Lincoln was not an ethical leader. Lincoln major goal was to preserve the union. If Lincoln was an ethical leader he would have focused on eradicating slavery when he first became president. Instead he made it long and drawn out until things wasn't going his way.
Abraham Lincoln was not an ethical leader, in fact all Lincoln wanted to do was impress the people and keep our country together. During the Civil War Lincoln only freed the slaves so that he would bring up the moral of the northern forces since so many were dying on the battlefield.
According to the way things played out in the war, I would say that Lincoln was a very practical, competent and level-headed leader. In the beginning of the war, all eyes were on him, waiting on his standing on the most important of all political issues of this time: the impending civil war. Lincoln clearly states in his first inaugural speech that he is indifferent to the matter of slavery, and that Lincoln's loyalty is first to the constitution of the Union, not his own personal views on the matter.
This very centralist outlook on the most controversial topic of the country was key in Lincoln's initial plan of coaxing the Confederate states back to the Union. However, the South would not be denied, and Lincoln was forced to changed tactics.
Like the "good cop, bad cop" routine, Lincoln's new plan was to release the slaves as both a war tactic and a means to an end. He seems to then, in his second inaugural address, that the war was "in God's will" and will end according to His will. Though very inspirational to some, this appeared as a cop-out to many Northerners, who relinquished their support of the President. Still, I feel as though he was a very ethical leader, because, as per the code, he kept business above pleasure. Though it was most definately part of the reason, Lincoln adhered to professional protocal and did not end slavery simply because he thought it a moral evil.
Sure, he was practical. But was he ethical? How can you be morally opposed to slavery but allow it to continue?
Isn't this like Hitler saying he has to keep the concentration camps open because a lot of Germans like them?
Lincoln was an ethical leader because he was the person that most republicans in the north felt that their beliefs were similar and he would become a gracious leader in sending the union troops to war. Eventhough Lincoln was a Republican he also later started to have similar beliefs as Frederick Douglass "the runaway slave who had become the leading black author and orator of his time." Little did anyone know President Lincoln and Frederick Douglass were morally thinking the same. They both thought that slaves should be citizens of the United States and become free. Lincoln basically felt that slavery was a "moral evil" and deeply felt that it should be abolished.
If Lincoln truly felt that slavery should be abolished, why wasn't he out with John Brown helping slaves fight back against their masters?
(Brown is discussed in the middle of page 53)
Lincoln was an ethical leader because he had a focused goal for African-Americans to once be free and he succeded at this goal during his presidency. Lincoln was the president of the United States so he had to get both the North and the South on his side. He did this through making three speeches but they were all spoken in a different tone.
In Lincoln's First Inaugural Address he tries to get the South to return to the Union but they are reluctant because they believed that he was going to abolish slavery. Lincoln reassured them that he wasn't by stating, " I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery… I have no inclination to do so." In this quote it shows that he was taken a very clam tone to get the South back to the Union to support him.
In the Emancipation Proclamation, Lincoln has more of an stricter tone because he knew that he was going to upset the South and also some Northerners because he was freeing the slaves with no compromise. Lincoln states,"And by virture of the power and for the purpose aforesaid, I do order and declare that all persons held as slaves within[the confederate states] are…free." This makes Lincoln an ethical leader because this was his moral goal and he was fulfilling it.
In the Second Inaugral Lincoln has more of an agressive tone because he is angry with the south and to return them to the Union he uses God as a tactic to scare them. Lincoln states, " God gives to see the right…" He uses this to convience the South was wrong to have slaves because God said so. This was interesting because he knew that the North and South prays to the ssame God so they might acually believe what he was saying.
All these speeches contribute to why Lincoln is a ethical leader because he had a focused goal on freeing the slaves whichhe fulfullied throgh his presidency.
But the Emancipation Proclamation only freed slaves in the Confederate states, not the Union. So, really, this document didn't free any slaves at all.
Lincoln was not an ethical leader because he made decisions based on what would politically benefit him and not what was morally right. In the "Fredrick Douglass Influence on the War Strategy of Abraham Lincoln" by Edward C. Smith, he says that even though Lincoln thought that slavery was wrong he could not say that because he feared that he would lose support from his party (pg 59). This lead Lincoln to voted in favor of the thirteenth amendment which guaranteed slavery in the southern states. He did not do this because he liked the idea of it but because the Republican party would want him to be in favor of it (pg54).
Exactly. It seems here that politics interfere with his ethics.
I believe that Lincoln was an ethical leader in regards to his actions regarding slavery and the Civil War but not in the holy light that people place him in. Although he opposed slavery his job came before his views and as President his job was to put the lives of the entire country before his. I believe that Lincoln, if my thoughts are correct, might be the most brilliant President we've ever had. The reason being that he waited patiently before abolishing slavery and it paid off in the end. One must agree that although he was willing allow slavery to continue in the south his heart was in the right place but was stuck in a big dilemma. On one hand, he could look at the cup (The Nation) as half empty and continue life or he could try to empty the cup (abolish slavery) right away and risk losing the entire cup. His first inaugural speech is basically about this. He says that he will not interfere with the Southern states usage of slaves because he does not want to lose his fellow countrymen. Lincoln says that he is merely trying to prevent the expansion of slavery into newer states. Although not completely ethical, we must acknowledge that Lincoln based his ideas on as much good ethics as he possibly could. At the end of the day Lincoln was a politician bound by the needs of others, the majority, not his own personal thoughts. Unfortunately, the South ended up succeeding anyways and later on in the war Lincoln made an ethical decision based on not so ethical reasons. In 1863, Lincoln emancipated slaves in the C.S.A. and slaves across the south praised the bearded man with the top hat. Lincoln’s decision to free the slaves in South was seen as the result of a great ethical leader doing God’s will but it was not entirely so. While Lincoln disapproved of slavery he only freed the Southern slaves because he needed more soldiers to end the war. By freeing the slaves, Lincoln acquired an army of men with a will to win that rivaled that of Southern soldiers wanting to establish their own Confederacy. So somehow this seems like a Lincoln was not an ethical leader but he was, in the sneakiest of ways. Lincoln had a plan from the beginning to unite a wounded Union and in some way or another deal with the issue of slavery. At first he attempted to be humble and proposed a compromise to placate the South. We fail to recognize that by proposing this compromise, Lincoln was securing a future of freedom, however small, for blacks in the North and those that ventured West. This plan failed and Lincoln turned to drastic measures and emancipated the slaves. While this proclamation was ignored by Southern slave owners it firmly shifted the purpose of the war towards the topic of slavery. So by winning the war Lincoln would get what he always wanted in the form of the 13th amendment. So in conclusion, Lincoln was an ethical leader because he wanted to do right and although he was bound by politics he ended getting rid of what he hated, slavery. His proclamation was indeed a proclamation. A proclamation that slavery WOULD be dealt with in one way or another. With this, through trials and tribulations, Lincoln DID bring his views to center stage.
Interesting argument. It begs the question: how should politicians make decisions? Should they follow majority opinion or their own consciences/beliefs/ethics?
I still want to know, though: Is it ethical to be "patient" and "practical" in a situation such as this? When the issue is a moral one, is it ethical to wait?
President Abraham Lincoln was not an ethical leader, but rather a legal leader. Lincoln opposed the institution of slavery, however his focus at the beginning of his presidency was to preserve the union. In doing this he was willing to compromise his ethics and follow the supreme law of the land. Lincoln believed that slavery was morally wrong. However, in his inaugural address of the first term in office Lincoln stated, " I have no purpose, directly or indirectly, to interfere with the institution of slavery… I have no inclination to do so." If Lincoln was an ethical leader he would have focused on eradicating slavery from the beginning, which he did not do. This would have been a hard thing to do, but considering Lincoln’s rhetorical ability, he could probably have used the law to justify ending slavery. Also, It should have been clear to him that by trying to compromise he would have not made the Confederate states return. The act of seceding was radical and a radical act is founded on radical beliefs that are hard to change. The war as the author argues was inevitable.
Lincoln’s goal inclined towards the preservation of the union and to do that he followed the law. He argued that he could not end slavery where it existed, but he also wanted to prevent it from spreading. On the third year of the Civil War, Lincoln created the Emancipation Proclamation to end slavery in the Confederate states. In the Emancipation Proclamation he used legal terms to justify his decision of freeing slaves. He wrote, “And upon this act, sincerely believed to be an act of justice, warranted by the Constitution upon military necessity, I invoke the considerate judgment of mankind and the gracious favor of Almighty God” This quote demonstrates that Lincoln placed the judgment of mankind (who created laws) over the judgments based on morals. The Emancipation Proclamation served both purposes, ending an immoral institution (Lincoln believed this) and following the rule of law. Lincoln was a legal leader because he followed his foundations of law, instead of his moral beliefs to make decisions before and during the Civil War. Finally he argued that ending slavery was the only way to keep the country together. Therefore, the main reason for ending slavery for Lincoln was to preserve the union, not to do what was morally right.
I wonder, if Lincoln truly believed it would be unconstitutional for him to end slavery where it existed, why he issued the proclamation at all. Was he contradicting himself in this way as well?
Another question:
If the war had ended earlier, would slavery have ended with it? Ironically, the war Lincoln wished to prevent actually allowed him to see his vision of a slave-free America come to fruition.
Some might think that Lincoln only free the slaves because he wanted to save the Union and not because he thought it was unmoral. Well I kind of agreed with the idea I think he was an ethical leader. Lincoln was in charge for freeing the slaves. The definition of ethical is to be consistent with agreed principles of correct moral conduct. “They argued that Lincoln freed the slaves only as a consequence of military necessity and their liberation was not rooted in his respect for their inherent humanity.” I disagreed with this quote because when Lincoln made the proclamation it was clear that he wanted to free the slaves because he knew it was not moral. He even state that the states can’t say no to emancipation of the slaves. From the Proclamation “All persons held as slaves within any State or designated part of a State the people whereof shall then be in rebellion against the United States shall be then, thenceforward, and forever free; and the executive government of the United States, including the military and naval authority thereof, will recognize and maintain the freedom of such persons and will do no act or acts to repress such persons, or any of them, in any efforts they may make for their actual freedom.” Therefore, Lincoln was an ethical leader. By making a proclamation is proving that he did have some ideas of the morality of slavery and that it was a burden to him. I know that Lincoln only freed the slaves in the Confederate states but he only did that because the most African Americans in the Union were already free.
Lincoln was a realist. He believed that slavery was morally wrong but "understood that no matter how evil slavery was, it could not be abolished in those states where it already exist". (pg52) Lincoln was a ethical man when preaching to the people, however he knew that his actions were limited, making him a man of contradictions. Lincoln debated against Douglas and lost support from his own hometown. This shows us that Lincoln was ethical following his morals. But the problem is that his actions were ethical to a certain extent. Lincoln did not want slavery to spread but gave southern states comfort that the law will protect slavery where it already exist. Lincoln believed that slavery went against the idea that our country was founded on, which was equality. Lincoln, however could not be 100 percent ethical because the laws and politics did not allow him to follow his own morals. Lincoln made decisions that was in favor of his party instead of his beliefs. Brenda on page 54 brought to my attention that Lincoln did this when he voted on an amendment that benefited the south and slavery. This makes Lincoln partially an ethical leader because his beliefs did not reflect all of America, in addition the people he was leading.